Intel Core 7 150UL vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

Intel Core 7 150UL and Intel Core 7 360 represent two distinct approaches to low-power computing within Intel’s current lineup. The 150UL is a Raptor Lake-PS part designed for desktop sockets, while the 360 is a Wildcat Lake mobile processor built on a much smaller node. The recorded data shows a clear split in capabilities: the 150UL offers more cores and threads, while the 360 delivers significantly higher benchmark scores across every measured workload. This analysis examines where each processor wins, the architectural choices behind those results, and what the numbers indicate for different use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core 7 360 wins in every single recorded test. Out of the 18 benchmark entries for the 360, it outperforms the 150UL in all of them, and the 150UL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database at all. This means the 360 is the only processor with measurable performance data, and its wins span both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads.

The 360’s dominance is most pronounced in multi-core applications. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 13634 points, which places it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 18374, putting it in the same performance tier as the Intel Core i3-13100, which scores 18380, and the Intel Core 5 330, which scores 18345. The delta percentages against these rivals are nearly zero, meaning the 360 effectively matches these desktop-class processors despite being a 15-watt mobile chip.

The 150UL, by contrast, has no benchmark entries and a percentile ranking of 50. Its lack of recorded scores means the database contains no direct evidence of its performance. What the data does show is that the 150UL is designed around a higher core count, 10 cores and 12 threads, which could theoretically benefit heavily threaded workloads, but without benchmark data, this remains speculative. The 360, with 6 cores and 6 threads, already delivers strong multi-threaded results, as seen in its PassMark multithread score of 15544.

For single-threaded performance, the 360 again leads. Its Cinebench R20 single-core score of 808 and PassMark single-thread score of 4274 indicate strong per-core efficiency. The 150UL’s higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz compared to the 360’s 4.80 GHz suggests it might have an advantage in lightly threaded tasks, but no benchmark confirms this. The data records wins only for the 360.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families and manufacturing nodes. The Intel Core 7 150UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on Intel’s 10 nm process. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process, also by Intel. This node difference is substantial: the 3 nm process allows for significantly higher transistor density and power efficiency compared to 10 nm.

Core configurations differ sharply. The 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement with performance and efficiency cores, typical of Raptor Lake designs. The 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading or efficiency cores; all cores appear to be full performance cores. Despite fewer cores, the 360’s per-core cache is much larger: 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, versus 80 KB and 1.25 MB respectively for the 150UL. The 150UL compensates with a larger shared L3 cache of 12 MB, while the 360 has only 6 MB.

Memory support also diverges. The 150UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, giving it flexibility for desktop builds. The 360 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The single-channel design is a notable limitation for memory-intensive workloads, though the 360’s benchmark results suggest it does not bottleneck overall performance.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The 150UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The 150UL’s graphics solution is likely more capable for general display output and light media tasks, though no graphics benchmarks are recorded. The 360’s Xe3 architecture is newer and may offer better efficiency, but the database does not include graphics performance data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Since the head-to-head benchmark list is empty and the 150UL has no scores, the comparison relies entirely on the 360’s recorded results and the architectural specifications of both chips. The 360’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 13634 is a strong indicator of its multi-threaded capability. The R20 multicore score of 5726 and R15 multicore score of 1374 follow the same trend. These numbers show that the 360, despite being a 6-core mobile processor, delivers performance comparable to desktop quad-core parts like the Intel Core i3-13100, which has an average score of 18380.

Single-threaded results for the 360 are equally solid. Cinebench R23 single-core scores 1924, R20 single-core scores 808, and R15 single-core scores 193. The PassMark single-thread score of 4274 reinforces this. These figures indicate that the 360’s per-core performance is high, likely due to its 3 nm process and large L2 cache. The 150UL’s 5.00 GHz boost clock is higher than the 360’s 4.80 GHz, but without benchmark data, the impact of that clock advantage cannot be quantified.

PassMark results for the 360 show balanced performance across different workload types. Integer math scores 34238, floating-point math scores 44963, and extended instructions score 12390. Data compression scores 142877, while data encryption scores 11164. The physics score is 1213, and random string sorting scores 17636. Prime number finding scores 120, which is a relatively low figure but consistent with the chip’s core count and clock speed. These results collectively place the 360 in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, a strong position for a 15-watt mobile processor.

The nearest rivals for the 360 are all Intel desktop parts: the Core i3-13100 with an average score of 18380 and a delta of 0%, the Core 5 330 with 18345 and a delta of 0.2%, the Core i3-14100 with 18318 and a delta of 0.3%, and the Core 3 305 with 18302 and a delta of 0.4%. These tiny deltas mean the 360 performs within a fraction of a percent of these chips, an impressive feat for a mobile processor. The 150UL, with no scores, cannot be placed in this context.

Specification Differences

The specification tables for the two processors reveal several key differences beyond architecture and node. The 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks differ slightly: 1.70 GHz for the 150UL versus 1.50 GHz for the 360. Boost clocks also differ: 5.00 GHz for the 150UL versus 4.80 GHz for the 360. Both are 15-watt parts.

Socket compatibility is a major differentiator. The 150UL uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket, while the 360 uses Intel BGA 1516, a mobile soldered socket. This means the 150UL is designed for replaceable desktop motherboards, while the 360 is intended for embedded or laptop use. The market segment confirms this: the 150UL is listed as Desktop, while the 360 is listed as Mobile.

Cache hierarchies differ in size and organization. The 150UL has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with 12 MB of shared L3. The 360 has 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, with only 6 MB of shared L3. The 360’s larger per-core caches likely contribute to its higher single-threaded performance, while the 150UL’s larger L3 may help with shared data across more cores.

Memory support and PCIe lanes also differ. The 150UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, while the 360 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. PCIe connectivity: the 150UL has Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the 360 has Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. Neither supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

Release dates and production status are similar. The 150UL was released in April 2024, while the 360 was released in April 2026. Both are listed as Active. The 360 has a launch MSRP of $426. The 150UL has no recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The 150UL is built on Intel’s 10 nm process, while the 360 is built on Intel’s 3 nm process.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 360 support DDR4 memory?

A: No. The 360 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The 150UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: How does the 360 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 360’s average benchmark score is 18374. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-13100, scores 18380, a delta of 0%. The Core 5 330 scores 18345 (0.2% delta), the Core i3-14100 scores 18318 (0.3% delta), and the Core 3 305 scores 18302 (0.4% delta).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the 360?

A: The 360 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The 150UL has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the 360 has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points decisively to the Intel Core 7 360 as the higher-performing processor. Every recorded score belongs to the 360, and its 72nd percentile ranking places it well above the 150UL’s 50th percentile. The 360’s 3 nm process, larger per-core caches, and efficient core design deliver performance that matches desktop chips like the Core i3-13100, despite being a 15-watt mobile part with only 6 cores.

The Intel Core 7 150UL, on the other hand, has no recorded benchmark scores. Its advantages are structural: 10 cores, 12 threads, a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz, a larger 12 MB L3 cache, dual-channel memory support, and a desktop socket with more PCIe lanes. These specifications suggest it could handle heavily threaded workloads or desktop builds requiring memory flexibility, but the database contains no evidence of actual performance.

Users seeking proven performance should look to the 360, especially for single-threaded tasks and efficient multi-core work. The 150UL remains a speculative option for desktop systems where core count and memory options matter more than measured speed. The data shows one clear winner in every benchmark, and that winner is the Intel Core 7 360.